To bite or not to bite: Canine apprehensions in a large, suburban police department

Journal of Criminal Justice

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 147-154

  Hickey, Edward R ^a   Hoffman, Peter B ^b  

^a Prince George's Community College   (United States)

^b NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0037367613     PISSN: 00472352     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0047-2352(02)00221-0     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. Campbell, A., Berk, R. A., & Fyfe, J. J. (1998). Deployment of violence: The Los Angeles Police Department's use of dogs. Evaluation Review, 22, 535-561.
2. Fallis, D. S., & Washington, C. W. (2001, December 30). Canine unit conspicuous for number of attacks, some of them disabling. The Washington Post, A1.
3. International Association of Chiefs of Police. (1992). Law enforcement canines. The training key (No. 421). Arlington, VA: Author.
4. Montgomery County Department of Police. (2000). Special operating procedures, special operations division, canine section (Appendix G). Rockville, MD: Author.
5. Montgomery County Park and Planning Commission. (1997). Montgomery County census update survey summary report. Rockville, MD: Montgomery County.
6. Smith, D. (1991). Ontario canine unit is cost effective. Law and Order, 39, 49-51.
7. Stowe, H. B. (1851/1962). Uncle Tom's cabin. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
8. Strandberg, K. W. (1997). Canine units. Law Enforcement Technology, 50-55.
9. Warrell, G. (1999). Increasing K-9 success. Law and Order, 47, 49-51.
10. Washington, C. W. (2002, January 2). Suits impugn Pr. George's canine use. The Washington Post, B1.
11. Zwickey, J. (1988). Is there a future for police canine? Concord, CA: (Doc. 110318). Unpublished paper, National Criminal Justice Reference Service.